By Chris Trotter*
Power, if it is to have any lasting legacy, must be seized. Not inherited, not bestowed, but taken. Those who seize power do so for many reasons: self-preservation; personal aggrandizement; to effect changes long desired or too long delayed. Power stripped of the crucial element of conscious personal purpose is reduced to mere placeholding, and placeholding represents the end of politics, the final step taken before all power is lost.
Christopher Luxon did not seize power; he inherited it from a National Party caucus at its wits’ end. His colleagues bestowed the party leadership upon him because they had run out of choices. That he was new and untested mattered less than the certainty that any other candidate would likely prolong and intensify the internecine strife that was making National unelectable.
That Luxon had arrived wearing John Key’s cloak of approbation made his elevation to the leadership considerably easier. Key had made winning and wielding power look easy; if Luxon possessed anything remotely resembling the talents of his sponsor, then National was saved.
Five years on National does not feel saved.
Those with the skill and experience to read election results correctly understood that the victory of the Right in 2023 was a reflection of the electorate’s profound hostility toward the hapless Labour Government which a majority of New Zealanders had elected only three years earlier. The parties of the Right had won by default in 2023. More importantly, they had not won well.
Christopher Luxon may have been promoted by John Key, but he could not lift his party to the heights scaled by his predecessors. Between 2008 and 2014 the Key-led National Party’s share of the Party Vote never fell below 44.93 percent and twice topped 47 percent. Even Bill English, Key’s successor as Prime Minister, secured 44.4 percent of the Party Vote in the General Election of 2017.
Luxon brought home just 38.06 percent of the Party Vote in 2023, a figure which, at 6 percentage points below National’s 2017 result, conferred ample (if undeserved) opportunities for mischief-making upon Act and NZ First, the volatile coalition partners to which Luxon was bound for the next three years.
Once again Luxon had inherited power; once again it had been bestowed upon him. If he was not to become a placeholder, then he would have to emulate Shakespeare’s character Hotspur from Henry IV Part 1. Being warned by a fellow nobleman that his plan is dangerous, Hotspur replies:
Why, that’s certain. ’Tis
to sleep, to drink; but I
of this nettle, danger, we
Luxon is no Hotspur, he has little appetite for the stinging nettles of coalition politics – no matter how precious the flowers they guard. Doubtless Luxon would also point out that Hotspur’s reckless career did not end well.
True enough, but in not risking the dangers of staring down his coalition partners; by not convincing them that he would stake everything for the power he needed to be an effective political leader; Luxon not only failed to avoid danger, but he also lost any chance of securing the precious flower of electoral safety.
Luxon’s supporters would no doubt object that he is not interested in developing the political instincts of a medieval monarch. The skills he prizes are those of an effective CEO. Luxon is content to pick his subordinates and leave them to it. The role he claims is not that of Captain, but Coach. His job is to promote optimum performance from his Cabinet and purge it of those who fail to deliver.
Unfortunately, politics doesn’t work like that. In politics one has to be a player, and to reach the top one has to be the best player. In politics leaders may be blessed with many talents, but if they are unable to demonstrate competence, provoke admiration and inspire loyalty, then they will lack that most important and indispensable component of successful political leadership – followers!
In this regard there is nothing to choose between the political players of the modern era and those of the Middle Ages. To stand on the stage of the Beehive Theatrette and mumble incoherently is the contemporary equivalent of falling off one’s horse and dropping one’s sword at a medieval tournament. It is not the sort of behaviour that inspires either confidence or admiration, and it most certainly does not inspire loyalty!
To be a poor player when many of one’s subordinates are clearly superior players should at the very least encourage humility and modesty in a leader. Failure to demonstrate a sustained improvement in performance, however, should encourage a letter of resignation.
Sadly, very few leaders respond in this fashion. Most commonly poorly performing leaders react by becoming jealous and resentful of their subordinates’ successes. Almost always this causes a leader to behave vindictively – especially if unflattering comparisons begin to be made between a prime minister’s failures and the successes of his or her most effective ministers.
Christopher Luxon’s public humiliation of his own most effective minister, Chris Bishop, offers a classic example of a leader grown fearful of a too obviously superior player of the political game. By stripping Bishop of his role as Campaign Manager of the 2026 Election Luxon was openly insulting his most able lieutenant. That Bishop may have been testing the caucus’s loyalty to Luxon in the latter part of 2025 does not excuse the Prime Minister’s behaviour, a leader worthy of the name would not have provoked such a test!
How will Chris Bishop respond to being removed from National’s electoral control-room? If Christopher Luxon is as unlucky as King Richard II, Bishop will take his lead from Henry Bolingbroke (1367-1413).
The most formidable knight in England and heir to the vast estates of the Duchy of Lancaster, Bolingbroke earned the undying enmity of Richard by engineering the removal of a slew of the King’s most corrupt court favourites. Not content with exiling Henry, Richard decided to deny him his inheritance, seizing his late father’s lands and castles for himself.
Unsurprisingly, Henry returned to England and raised the banner of rebellion against Richard. Very soon most of the nobility was riding at his side. They reasoned, quite correctly, that if the King could seize the Duke of Lancaster’s property, then he could just as easily seize theirs. Richard was forced to abdicate. Henry Bolingbroke became King Henry IV.
Political commentators will reject this scenario on the grounds that all Bishop has to do is wait for Luxon to lose the election and then replace him. Perhaps they are right. Perhaps, in this cynical age, theirs is indeed the most sensible option.
Those of a more chivalric temperament will beg to differ. A leader, actual or potential, does not keep his crown by squandering the admiration and respect of his followers. If Chris Bishop means to use political power for a purpose, then he would be wise to seize it, now, and go on to lead his party and the coalition to victory.
That would prove to his party, his coalition partners, and the country, that he is indubitably New Zealand’s best political player. Not a placeholder, but the man who should be king.
*Chris Trotter has been writing and commenting professionally about New Zealand politics for more than 30 years. He writes a weekly column for interest.co.nz. His work may also be found at http://bowalleyroad.blogspot.com.
36 Comments
National voter and agree.
Not a National voter (and never a National voter when it is led by Luxon) and I agree.
It is not that complicated. There is only seven months to go and while Labour in opposition are reeling from two fairly serious questions concerning the integrity and veracity of its leader and when coupling that to the dubious calibre and unsound features of their prospective coalition parties, why would National start into rocking their own boat with an internal power struggle. If Mr Bishop has earned the recognition of potential future leadership then odds on he also possesses enough wit and skill to understand the importance of timing, as it may be relative. I would suggest that he and his colleagues universally agree that unquestionably, the next seven months priority is for National to continue in government.
I agree 100% , as per CT article, his time is now or later not just before the election.
Luxy is like Scott Barrett, leader in name only. Everyone can see that Ardie is the real Leader.
Who emerges left and right to clear the decks.... Hippy is as screwed as Luxy
Yeh agree with ya on this one too.
“Seize power now” sounds great in theory, but 7 months out just looks messy to voters.
If there’s a change coming, probably cleaner to do it post-election
Luxon's unlikely to step down straight after winning a second term if that turns out to be the case.
If they lose the next election there's a fair chance they won't get another shot at power for 6 or 9 years. The economy will recover no matter who's in charge, and when it does, that government will be safe.
I doubt Bishop has the patience to sit in opposition that long. He wouldn't be able to survive the leadership through a 2029 election loss, and he'd be history.
On top of that, his own seat is risky this year and Luzon won't put him high enough on the list to survive, so he may be jobless even by the end of the year.
Neither man has shown they can address the future.
Both have future-inapplicable track records (business, touting).
That impasse is showing up in the change Trotter SHOULD have been addressing - the need to put an able brain in the Energy portfolio. Because that is the Achille's Heel of neoliberal doctrine.
we are out of gas.
electricity is expensive now, before EVs are common place.
we have no real plan to address apart from NZF tinkering.
we will lose more business until this is addressed, watties etc
Run HVDC to Australia and build solar/nuclear in the outback?
There's all sorts of things we can do to fix this, but all the plans are beyond our dysfunctional domestic energy sector.
If Luxon is of such insecurity and vindictive nature to go such length to curtail the career of an mp who is evidencing quite some capability and achievement then he would obviously be putting his self interest well ahead of the good of the country. The electorate would be astute enough to recognise that certainly, and undoubtedly decrease even further, the public perception of him. Surely there is sufficient scruples and commonsense in the National Party itself, to prevent such a clumsy and blatant mistake. For instance Collins similarly imprudent attempt to sideline Bridges.
Do you have any idea how long it takes from ordering HVDC underwater cables, to actually getting the cables and installed? Demand is massive globally at present.
One lefty WEF wet replaced with another WEF wet. Sound advice from the left Mr. Trotter.
Speaking of future-inapplicable track records
"Luxon brought home just 38.06 percent of the Party Vote in 2023, a figure which, at 6 percentage points below National’s 2017 result, conferred ample (if undeserved) opportunities for mischief-making upon Act and NZ First, the volatile coalition partners to which Luxon was bound for the next three years."
In 2017 Labour's share of the party vote was 36.9%: we know how that turned out, welcome to MMP.
I rest my long-argued case
IMO National will be defeated by a considerable margin in the next general election, so why would Bishop want to lead with all the unpleasantness involved to achieve leadership prior to the election. There will be a shakedown in National post election and who will survive that is currently unknown.
Are you seriously suggesting a coalition of Labour, Greens and Te Pati Maori are going to win the next election comfortably.
Whatever Luxon's shortcomings there is genuine fear amongst many NZ'ers as to what the above 3 would do to the fabric of NZ if they ever got the reigns of power.
That kindergarten gang demonstrated their abilities in basic abc's (attitude, behaviour, competence) to NZdrs last time. Nothing they've said or done since suggests any improvement.
Unfortunately people vote for parties that best represent their personal values. In a normal distribution half the population is below the mean.
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.” Now Luxon is hardly Napoleon but one would hope that the National hierarchy can comprehend that there is absolutely no need to destabilise their own position by mimicking the instability and ructions on going in the opposition camp.
The 'fabric of NZ' is fraying fast, regardless of who is in government.
It's just a physics thing - have a good look at that Artemis photo of the planet. Do you seriously think that one species could grow its consumption of that little ball, for very long?
Only by accounting in something artificial, could you pretend that - and not for long either.
Nobody - of any Party - is addressing that truth. Although the Greens have less distance to go than the others.
Interesting how they launched Artemis on April Fool's Day
I think the Scientists involved will be more interested in the appropriate time to achieve the complex gravitational maneuvers involved in the trip rather than worrying about that kind of thing.
You don't decide the day for this kind of thing based on whimsy.
These scientists just so happen to end a 19,461 day drought of humans travelling to the moon with the launch window falling on Aprils Fool’s Day in 2026.
This launch date was also 33 days since the eve of Operation Epic Fury commencing. The number 33 is the most significant number in esoteric and institutional symbolism. It represents the highest degree of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry. There are also 33 vertebrae in the human spine. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism all assign specific weight to the number 33.
The rocket height was 322 feet tall.
322 is the signature number of the Skull and Bones society. The Order 322 which references Yale’s chapter 322. However more layers to this number show it represents 322 BC the year Greek orator Demosthenes died. To the order, this marks the end of the “The Golden Age of Elegance” and a shift of power from the East to West. Many researches also point to Genesis 3:22 which is interpreted as man achieving godhood through hidden knowledge.
So theres a few numeric stamps off the bat with this launch event.
Not sure if this is a serious post. You can draw coincidences across many events and numbers if you're motivated.
Well, my neighbour has an Irish Wolfhound that on the 1st of April produced fecal matter that was 33mm in diameter and when laid out straight was 322mm in length. Said neighbour is an engineer so tends to measure everything.
And here's the kicker, the Wolfhound's name is "Mason".
So I think Time Lord might be onto something.
What happened top the number 6?
The dog did it's business at 6am (it's an early riser).
Well that's just a few right off the bat. How about we look at historical space missions coinciding with wars and possible connections:
Cold War - First Orbital Intel War
The Cold War was the debut of the Keyhole (KH) satellite programs. Instead of walls of concrete, reality became a ceiling of glass. Keyhole satellites were the birth of overhead dominance. It was the first time in human history that an entire superpower could be rendered transparent from above the atmosphere, the true high ground.
The Apollo 11 moon landing was broadcast to exactly 33 countries. Perhaps signalling to the world that the ‘Grand Architect’ of this era now possessed total vision, a permanent psychological and strategic checkmate over the earth.
Gulf War - First GPS War
This was the debut of navigating the war from space, by turning a desert into a digital grid. Before 1991 navigating the Iraq desert required using the sun and stars and an odometer. Iraqi forces assumed the deep desert was impassable. The US troops first issued handheld GPS receivers were nicknamed the “Sluggers”. This enabled Coalition forces to perform the famous left hook manoeuvre, moving thousands of vehicles through the desert at night to outflank the Iraqi army. GPS navigation allowed for a level of coordination that was impossible in previous eras.
The Hubble Space Telescope was launched in 1990 yet the world’s most expensive eye was effectively blind. It’s first major fix came in April 1991 with the deployment of its sister ‘Great Observatory’. During the mission astronauts performed the first unscheduled spacewalk in NASA history to manually deploy the GRO antenna. The mission landed on Runway 33 at Edwards Air Force Base. It wasn’t until December 1993 that the STS-61 mission fixed the Hubble’s vision completely.
Iran War - First AI War
The 2026 conflict is about processing at speeds that exceed human biology marking the collapse of the OODA loop (Observe, Orient, Decide, Act). In previous wars intelligence was gathered by humans and analysed by committees. Palentir’s Maven Smart system can now fuse satellite imagery , drone feeds, and signals intelligence in real time.
One the first day of Operation Epic Fury, US + Israel struck over 1000 targets in 24 hours. Military analysts noted that this pace would have required months of human planning, but it was recommended by AI strike packages in minutes.
Regarding the assassination of Ayatollah Ali Khameneu reports indicate AI pattern matching was used to identify his location through “high resolution intelligence fusion”, predicting where he would be before he could enter a hardened bunker. This represents the first time a major world leader was removed using AI driven predictive targeting.
I've provided some numerical stamps with Artemis II. Now keep in mind that Artemis II was launched on April Fool's Day and also coincides with the first AI war. Perhaps the footage requires closer inspection..
Crikey, drifting into a bit of abstract doom theory there lol
Yeh I get the bigger picture angle, but thats more long term than what actually plays out over an election cycle
Voters still gonna pick whats in front of them, not reset the whole system
Nothing to do with abstract theory. Just facts. We burn our way through 100 million barrels of oil - and 200 million barrel-equivalents in coal and gas - every day.
That's hard fact.
I liken it to discussing the carpet-replacement cost on B Deck of the Titanic - the fact is the sinking.
And that is what is driving conflict - several times too many people on that wee tennis-ball, all wanting a part of it.
You just used some facts but then incorrectly ascribed them to this conflict.
If this was about everything running out for everyone, you wouldn't have a handful of already wealthy states making power plays - much more of the world would be involved trying to lay claim also.
I think you can learn a lot from 2020 about what voters will do when the writing's on the wall. Whoever wins, I doubt TPM will be in the mix.
If the coalition looks like they're at zero chance of winning, you'll see strategic voting come to the fore.
If the polling remains close through the end of winter then probably you won't see that, but in likelihood NZF will go with whichever side can make the numbers. And it's likely to only be one side that can this time.
It's shaping up to be a very interesting contest anyway.
A leadership change in National will depend on how anxious selection committees and MPs in marginal electorates become.
Seizing power means disruption: how much more of that will an exhausted electorate tolerate?
Wouldn't an adult, orderly leadership transition in the face of the data be electorally preferable to the usual sturm und drang and empty media noise?
But, it's politics in the Wellybubble, so I guess not.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.